Guild Wars 2

Back before HOT was released I made a forum thread asking if it was really necessary to lock hammer and gyros into the scrapper traitline, limiting possible hammer and gyro build diversity.

Old Thread

So I ask again, Should they keep this mutually necessary restriction or get rid of it with the next expansion?

Imo the only valid counter argument back then was that it would make balancing harder. (challenge: Can you theorycraft an overpowered (difficult to nerf) build assuming this restriction didn’t exist?)

Share your thoughts.

I would like to keep it as is. Gives more meaning to the elite spec you choose which should in-theory be your role-defining traitline.

I’ve been against the decision to lock it to the elite spec. It doesn’t make sense from a practical standpoint. If as an engineer I like the hammer and don’t care for the scapper trait to buff it, but would like the hammer as a close combat option in a more traditional Engineer build, I don’t see why I can’t use it if I’ve paid the trait points to unlock the weapon.

The entire point of locking weapon and skills to the trait line is so you can’t cross-pollinate between elite specs. So no issues with one elite spec’s abilities being nerfed because they’re too powerful in the hands of another, for example.

Hyper Cutter.9376:

The entire point of locking weapon and skills to the trait line is so you can’t cross-pollinate between elite specs. So no issues with one elite spec’s abilities being nerfed because they’re too powerful in the hands of another, for example.

Basically, this.

If it helps, you can think of the elite specialisations as being equivalent to GW1’s secondary profession system (in some cases this is quite blatent – dragonhunter, for instance, is basically guardian/ranger). You have the core profession, and then you have a bit of something else mixed in, but your character can only go in so many directions at once.

Another consideration is that some of the elite specialisations do change the core mechanic, and two elite specialisations that both change the core mechanic could be totally incompatible with one another.

It would be terrible. Particularly in light of the changes to turrets. Hammer as currently implemented needs the scrapper line around it. Largely due to sustain.

Hammer isn’t a kit. So you won’t have the benefit of that trait from alchemy. Without that it falls to the scrapper line – the regeneration synergy between firearms and scrapper are your main source of sustain. Take that away and you’re stuck with either heal over time food, dolyak runes, or the now anemic healing turret. Without even a little organic regen on a melee profession that’s tough going.

To illustrate, go get your engineer, play it with rifle in melee range only and go fight monsters in a level eighty map. See how your health suffers. Even healing turret will have trouble keeping up. FIght more than one at a time and it gets worse. Then go play against a non AI opponent. It just goes further and further downhill. This with little change whether you use a power, a condition, or even a bunkery set of gear. It’s just too squishy to support the playstyle.

Unless something happens to change the talent in alchemy to give us passive regen regardless of kits or base weapons equipped it won’t be much fun. And if there was a chance of it happening, there are plenty of players here who would argue there’s enough in Alchemy’s favour right now without making it even more of a must-have trait line.